Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude, change the “Add to Cart” button to blue

opusfived.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 457 posts

Re: Claude, change the “Add to Cart” button to blue

#131

Post by embedding-shape »

tarxzvf wrote: post #112
_fat_santa wrote: post #84

At least with Codex, this has not been my experience at all. It still screws up sure, but in every case I can ask "why did you do this" and it can trace back what made it take that particular decision. Typically it's always that I either didn't specify the problem correctly or made a really dumb mistake (executing the task on the wrong project....did this one yesterday) or it's something within a skill file that inst…

Models hallucinate plausible answers to why they did things. It might be true and it might be complete fiction.

You can also literally tell them: "Here is your session ID: $ID, lookup the .jsonl session, trace exactly why this decision was being made, present evidence and concrete proof, no guessing or assumptions" and you'll get an evidence-based report without guesses.

Re: Claude, change the “Add to Cart” button to blue

#132

Post by jerf »

RGS1811 wrote: post #77
oujiii wrote: post #8

Haha this is spot on how I've been feeling lately. I find it unbearable to work with this model for this reason... any trick out there you can do to steer it not to overcomplicate things? I guess Codex here I come

`/model claude-opus-4-7`

There's also the fact that you are in control. You are not obligated to take the AI's commits. I don't even let it commit much of the time because commit time is review time for me. If it changes the button blue and does four other things, you can just take the blue change and discard the rest. It can't stop you.

This isn't a defense of it doing those four other things. It would be nice if it did what you wanted correctly. I'm just saying, as long as our programming skills have not completely atrophied, we have the power.

“Ford carried on counting quietly. This is about the most aggressive thing you can do to a computer, the equivalent of going up to a human being and saying "Blood...blood...blood...blood...” ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Re: Claude, change the “Add to Cart” button to blue

#136

Post by malfist »

throwaway6977 wrote: post #127
malfist wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you've been perfectly precise in your spec and language, isn't that programming? Why use a stochastic goblin to do things in that case?

It's just a lot faster at hammering it out than me pound for pound, and I can quickly rattle off via voice-to-text exactly what I want much faster than I can type all of the code (especially when across a few different files), in a huge majority of tasks I perform. It's also especially good at debugging by brute force quickly and at scale meaning e.g. it can start desperately bisecting diffs to find the source of a b…

And then you get two blue buttons and a terms of service talking about chemical sales

Re: Claude, change the “Add to Cart” button to blue

#138

Post by embedding-shape »

malfist wrote: post #120
_fat_santa wrote: post #84

At least with Codex, this has not been my experience at all. It still screws up sure, but in every case I can ask "why did you do this" and it can trace back what made it take that particular decision. Typically it's always that I either didn't specify the problem correctly or made a really dumb mistake (executing the task on the wrong project....did this one yesterday) or it's something within a skill file that inst…

When you've been perfectly precise in your spec and language, isn't that programming? Why use a stochastic goblin to do things in that case?

For me, typing "Create a new namespace with these enums, functions and traits, that should follow X, Y and Z constraints" is faster than typing all that code manually, and typing less is less straining on my hands/fingers.

Re: Claude, change the “Add to Cart” button to blue

#140

Post by skinfaxi »

taeric wrote: post #119
tarxzvf wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Models hallucinate plausible answers to why they did things. It might be true and it might be complete fiction.

I'm growing increasingly confident that this is how people often work, as well.

People don't make rational decisions that make rationalized decisions. Is there any thought to pulling your hand off a hot surface?
Post reply on HN